Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 12:11 AM - Re: closing wing (Peter Barthold)
2. 12:47 AM - shock absorbers for HDS (Peter Barthold)
3. 05:42 AM - Re: South African Builders (Jonathan Starke)
4. 05:54 AM - Re: Reaming aileron bellcrank for bushings? (dfmoeller)
5. 06:36 AM - Re: Re: Reaming aileron bellcrank for bushings? (Larry Winger)
6. 06:36 AM - 701 builders, bottom fuselage (Keith Ashcraft)
7. 07:19 AM - Re: Re: closing wing (LarryMcFarland)
8. 07:30 AM - Re: shock absorbers for HDS (Jeff Davidson)
9. 07:46 AM - Re: Control cables for 601XL ()
10. 08:08 AM - Thrust angle in an XL with a Jabiru 3300 (Joe)
11. 08:08 AM - Thrust angle in an XL with a Jabiru 3300 (Joe)
12. 08:22 AM - Re: Control cables for 601XL (Dave Johnson)
13. 08:24 AM - Is Dave Austin still on this list? (Paul Hartl)
14. 09:39 AM - Re: Control cables for 601XL ()
15. 09:55 AM - XL Progress (PatrickW)
16. 10:15 AM - Corvair engines (Greg Kendall)
17. 10:43 AM - Re: Neighbor's tried to (ashontz)
18. 11:05 AM - Re: Corvair engines (Papa Foxtrot)
19. 11:33 AM - Re: Re: Neighbor's tried to ()
20. 11:40 AM - Re: Corvair engines (Crvsecretary@aol.com)
21. 11:40 AM - Re: Corvair engines (Craig Payne)
22. 12:00 PM - Re: Control cables for 601XL (Bryan Martin)
23. 12:04 PM - Re: Corvair engines (Papa Foxtrot)
24. 12:31 PM - Re: Control cables for 601XL ()
25. 12:47 PM - Re: 10% from Wicks (C Smith)
26. 02:46 PM - Re: 10% from Wicks (Aaron Gustafson)
27. 03:51 PM - Re: Corvair engines (Bill Naumuk)
28. 03:52 PM - Re: 10% from Wicks (C Smith)
29. 03:59 PM - Re: Control cables for 601XL (Juan Vega)
30. 04:12 PM - Re: 10% from Wicks (R.P.)
31. 04:45 PM - Re: Corvair engines (Afterfxllc@aol.com)
32. 04:48 PM - Re: Thrust angle in an XL with a Jabiru 3300 (fred sanford)
33. 05:09 PM - Re: Re: Thrust angle in an XL with a Jabiru 3300 (Jerry Hey)
34. 06:40 PM - Neighbor's tried to (kensmith@springnet1.com)
Message 1
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: closing wing |
Hi Carlos,
I just closed the bottom of my left HDS wing. The reason to do this against the
advice of the manual was the need to stow away both wings. I found it easier
to place them securely on their finished bottoms. I can't close them fully since
they have to wait for inspection.
Second: I need to get the wings off the table before I can start on the ailerons.
To align them properly might be easier with the top skin still accessable.
btw: I also have to do the wing locker doors. Yours look really great, I played
around with the idea of having these nice fasteners...as always you're way ahead
of me... [Laughing]
Greetings from Germany
Peter Barthold
HDS TDO
Tail done wings in progress
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=127104#127104
Message 2
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | shock absorbers for HDS |
Hello Gang,
I am evaluating different scenarios for my HDS taildragger gear. I don't like the
idea of bulky gear parts sticking out of my leading edge.
When strolling through the archives I also found out, that installing the bungee
gear is not considered a piece of cake for most builders.
the alternative would be a Grove gear. But these also have the reputation of being
hard to adapt to a 601. plus they are quite heavy.
OTOH, I wouldn't want to deviate too much from the proven original design. My thoughts
are of vehicle (motorcycle?) shock absorbers to replace the ole bungee
assembly.
Has any of the gentlemen here heard or seen of anything similar already done?
any thoughts appreciated
Greetings from Germany
Peter
HDS TDO
tail done, Wings in progress
www.petersprojekt42.de
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=127106#127106
Message 3
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | South African Builders |
Hi I am in Cape Town.
Jonathan Starke
601XL 79hrs and counting.
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
>[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Capetonian
>Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2007 7:58 AM
>To: zenith-list@matronics.com
>Subject: RE: Zenith-List: South African Builders
>
>
>Howzit,
>
>You might want to join the avcom.co.za forum, there are a few Zenith
>builders prowling around there.
>
>There was also a chap who posted some stunning pics of his
>white ZS- Zenith
>flying along the coast but I cannot remember who it was, you
>might want to
>search the Matronics Forum.
>
>I'm a future builder, 100% South African but living in Europe
>so I am not
>much help!
>
>Mark
>
>Do not archive.
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
>[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
>martyn@flight.co.za
>Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2007 6:55 AM
>To: zenith-list@matronics.com
>Subject: Zenith-List: South African Builders
>
>
>Hello All.
>
>Anybody recall nmaes amnd contact details of South African
>Zenith builders
>at all?
>
>Thanks in advance
>
>Do not archive
>
>
Message 4
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Reaming aileron bellcrank for bushings? |
My 601 was made from a factory kit by the builder (not me), original issue 2001
vintage. I managed to do some wing damage, so some repairs are being made.
I ordered the most recent 3/06 drawings in the process. Here is what I've found.
0. In looking at the 1st and last set of drawings, there is no difference in dimensions
on the two sets.
1. My bushings slide easily into the spacer blocks. There is no discernable slop
and certainly not an interference fit. There is a little grease between the
bushing and spacers.
2. The vertical stack up of the spacers and bellcrank are less than the bushing
- meaning the angle brackets can only clamp the bushing when torqued (since
the vertical displacement between brackets is exactly the same measurement as
the bushing, any pressure at all will ensure clamping).
3. The angle brackets are installed on the rib (per the assembly instructions)
by torquing the bushing between the brackets and then riveting in place - guaranteeing
an immobile bushing.
4. The following statement was added to the drawing 6W10 sometime between my two
issues: "6W10-3 bearing surface is between bushing & spacer".
Intuitively, I too would have thought the bearing surface would have been designed
to be between the steel bolt shank and bushing (easily replaceable), but not
so.
Doug
leinad wrote:
> Doug,
> Perhaps you have a different version of the drawings. My drawings date 12/03
don't stack up that way at all.
> The 3 aluminum parts 1/4 + 1/8 + 1/4 = .625
> Then the drawing calls for .012 inches of the bushing sticking out past the aluminum..
This gives .649.. inches. THis is equal to 16.48 mm. The drawing also
says the bushing is 16.5 mm long.
> This is all on drawing 6w10.
> Then on drawing 6w6 it shows the brackets also 16.5 mm appart.
> So the drawings call for line on line to 2 thou under depending on which drawing
to believe. In the machine shop that's called a slip fit.
> I think the better assembly would be a press fit for the bushing and a slip fit
for the "sandwhich" between the brackets. (just as the drawings show) The aluminum
makes a terrible bearing. Steel bolt sliding against the bushing should
last much longer. Check any machinist handbook on this.
> Dan
>
>
> > I just assembled this area in a wing I've had to rebuild.
> >
> > The way that bushing works is that the bolt clamps the bushing solid with the
L brackets. This is obvious from the fact that the bushing is a slight bit
longer than the stackup being clamped. The bearing surface is between the blocks
on the bellcrank and the bushing. An interference fit is too tight. What you
want is the bushing to just slide into the blocks with as little slop as possible.
I would ream.
> >
> > The downside to making it too big, even a couple thousandths, will be sloppy
aileron control, maybe not the end of the world!
> >
> > Doug
>
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=127130#127130
Message 5
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Reaming aileron bellcrank for bushings? |
FWIW, I came to the same conclusion after multiple re-readings of the 6W10
plans (3/2006 revision), and a call to Zenith. They apparently want to
protect the bolt from any wear, whatsoever. That is only accomplished if
the bushing can spin freely in the bellcrank block and is then immobilized
through the clamping action provided between the aileron bellcrank supports
(6W6-11).
Larry Winger
Tustin, CA
601XL/Corvair
On 8/2/07, dfmoeller <dfmoeller@austin.rr.com> wrote:
>
>
> My 601 was made from a factory kit by the builder (not me), original issue
> 2001 vintage. I managed to do some wing damage, so some repairs are being
> made. I ordered the most recent 3/06 drawings in the process. Here is what
> I've found.
>
> 0. In looking at the 1st and last set of drawings, there is no difference
> in dimensions on the two sets.
> 1. My bushings slide easily into the spacer blocks. There is no
> discernable slop and certainly not an interference fit. There is a little
> grease between the bushing and spacers.
> 2. The vertical stack up of the spacers and bellcrank are less than the
> bushing - meaning the angle brackets can only clamp the bushing when torqued
> (since the vertical displacement between brackets is exactly the same
> measurement as the bushing, any pressure at all will ensure clamping).
> 3. The angle brackets are installed on the rib (per the assembly
> instructions) by torquing the bushing between the brackets and then riveting
> in place - guaranteeing an immobile bushing.
> 4. The following statement was added to the drawing 6W10 sometime between
> my two issues: "6W10-3 bearing surface is between bushing & spacer".
>
> Intuitively, I too would have thought the bearing surface would have been
> designed to be between the steel bolt shank and bushing (easily
> replaceable), but not so.
>
> Doug
>
>
> leinad wrote:
> > Doug,
> > Perhaps you have a different version of the drawings. My drawings date
> 12/03 don't stack up that way at all.
> > The 3 aluminum parts 1/4 + 1/8 + 1/4 = .625
> > Then the drawing calls for .012 inches of the bushing sticking out past
> the aluminum.. This gives .649.. inches. THis is equal to 16.48 mm. The
> drawing also says the bushing is 16.5 mm long.
> > This is all on drawing 6w10.
> > Then on drawing 6w6 it shows the brackets also 16.5 mm appart.
> > So the drawings call for line on line to 2 thou under depending on which
> drawing to believe. In the machine shop that's called a slip fit.
> > I think the better assembly would be a press fit for the bushing and a
> slip fit for the "sandwhich" between the brackets. (just as the drawings
> show) The aluminum makes a terrible bearing. Steel bolt sliding against
> the bushing should last much longer. Check any machinist handbook on this.
> > Dan
> >
> >
> > > I just assembled this area in a wing I've had to rebuild.
> > >
> > > The way that bushing works is that the bolt clamps the bushing solid
> with the L brackets. This is obvious from the fact that the bushing is a
> slight bit longer than the stackup being clamped. The bearing surface is
> between the blocks on the bellcrank and the bushing. An interference fit is
> too tight. What you want is the bushing to just slide into the blocks with
> as little slop as possible. I would ream.
> > >
> > > The downside to making it too big, even a couple thousandths, will be
> sloppy aileron control, maybe not the end of the world!
> > >
> > > Doug
> >
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=127130#127130
>
>
Message 6
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | 701 builders, bottom fuselage |
All, I am trying to do some pre-drilling holes in the bottom fuselage
(7F2-3). To start off with, my plans 4th, 6th printing, show that there
is 303mm between cl to cl of 7F1-3 and 7F1-4, but the
assembly/construction manual 1.2 04/2003, ( Fuselage Section 1 - page 3
of 10) states that there should be 285mm between the two. What are some
of you scratch builders using, or what is the factory pre-drilled holes
measuring?
Thanks,
Keith
N 38.9947
W 105.1305
Alt. 9,100'
CH701 -- scratch
*****************************************************************
This e-mail and any files transmitted with it may be proprietary
and are intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to
whom they are addressed. If you have received this e-mail in
error please notify the sender. Please note that any views or
opinions presented in this e-mail are solely those of the author
and do not necessarily represent those of ITT Corporation. The
recipient should check this e-mail and any attachments for the
presence of viruses. ITT accepts no liability for any damage
caused by any virus transmitted by this e-mail.
*******************************************************************
Message 7
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: closing wing |
Hi Peter,
I'd recommend you place the wing forward of the area you assemble the
aileron so that you can trim to fit progressively.
The ends of the wing and clearance for movement are otherwise difficult
to match up. Drawings alone sometimes don't quite do it.
http://www.macsmachine.com/images/wing/ailerons/full/hingealign.gif
http://www.macsmachine.com/images/wing/ailerons/full/leftendrearview.gif
http://www.macsmachine.com/images/wing/ailerons/full/leftinsideend.gif
http://www.macsmachine.com/images/wing/ailerons/full/inbrdtrimedge.gif
Good luck,
Larry McFarland 601HDS at www.macsmachine.com
Peter Barthold wrote:
>
> Hi Carlos,
>
> I just closed the bottom of my left HDS wing. The reason to do this against the
advice of the manual was the need to stow away both wings. I found it easier
to place them securely on their finished bottoms. I can't close them fully since
they have to wait for inspection.
> Second: I need to get the wings off the table before I can start on the ailerons.
To align them properly might be easier with the top skin still accessable.
> btw: I also have to do the wing locker doors. Yours look really great, I played
around with the idea of having these nice fasteners...as always you're way
ahead of me... [Laughing]
>
> Greetings from Germany
> Peter Barthold
> HDS TDO
> Tail done wings in progress
>
>
>
Message 8
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: shock absorbers for HDS |
>When strolling through the archives I also found out, that installing the bungee
gear is not considered a piece of cake for most builders.
>the alternative would be a Grove gear. But these also have the reputation of being
hard to adapt to a 601. plus they are quite heavy.
Peter,
After readings posts on the bungee gear installation for years and searching
the archives, I was apprehensive about them too. When it came time to install
them, I made the tool described in the archives - and probably on the 601.org
web site too. Forewarned and with the techniques advertised by those who
have gone before, the actual installation simply wasn't a problem. I used some
dental squeezers to put the bolts into well reamed holes without much fuss.
It really isn't that bad and help is available.
Jeff Davidson
do not archive
Message 9
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Control cables for 601XL |
Sort of a side issue----- While I wouldn't advocate using string or
safety wire for control cables, it does seem a bit of overkill to use a
cable stronger than the max gross weight of the aircraft. It's not
possible, even under high adrenalin situations, to exert anywhere near
breaking strength of the cable, particularly sitting in the cockpit. If
anything, you'd rip the control surface apart first, assuming you could
maintain that much air load on the part. Same goes for turnbuckles. Do
we really need 900 pound breaking-strength turnbuckles on an elevator we
could put, at most, 200 pounds of backstick pull?
Paul Rodriguez
601XL/Corvair
Canopy getting close to done
----- Original Message -----
From: Larry Winger<mailto:larrywinger@gmail.com>
To: zenith-list@matronics.com<mailto:zenith-list@matronics.com>
Sent: Wednesday, August 01, 2007 9:00 AM
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Control cables for 601XL
Juan,
If you look at my first post, you'll see that I did call Zenith and
that stimulated my question to the list. The person in the shop was
almost positive they were using stainless steel. Obviously, I didn't
get my answer from the designer or an engineer. Maybe that is my next
step (or I can just use galvanized to be safe).
Thanks,
Larry Winger
On 8/1/07, Juan Vega
<amyvega2005@earthlink.net<mailto:amyvega2005@earthlink.net>> wrote:
<amyvega2005@earthlink.net <mailto:amyvega2005@earthlink.net>>
check with zenith but I beleieve I used GLAV 7x19 with 2000Lb
strength versus SS7x19 with 1750 lbs strength.
Jaun
-----Original Message-----
>From: Larry Winger <
larrywinger@gmail.com<mailto:larrywinger@gmail.com>>
>Sent: Aug 1, 2007 12:30 AM
>To: zenith-list@matronics.com<mailto:zenith-list@matronics.com>
>Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Control cables for 601XL
>
>I'm planning to purchase my cable from Aircraft Spruce, so I'm
making an
>assumption that it is aviation grade as you described. If so, any
thoughts
>on stainless steel in place of the specified galvanized?
>
>Larry Winger
>601XL/Corvair
>Tustin, CA
>
>
>On 7/31/07, Juan Vega
<amyvega2005@earthlink.net<mailto:amyvega2005@earthlink.net>> wrote:
>>
amyvega2005@earthlink.net<mailto:amyvega2005@earthlink.net>>
>>
>> use the 7x19 aviation grade. they are grease impregnated.
>>
>> Juan
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> >From: lwinger <
larrywinger@gmail.com<mailto:larrywinger@gmail.com>>
>> >Sent: Jul 31, 2007 6:29 PM
>> >To: zenith-list@matronics.com<mailto:zenith-list@matronics.com>
>> >Subject: Zenith-List: Control cables for 601XL
>> >
<larrywinger@gmail.com<mailto:larrywinger@gmail.com>>
>> >
>> >The plans (6-B-23) say 1/8" 7x19 Galvanized control cables. The
folks in
>> the shop at Zenith say they are using stainless steel.
>> >
>> >Stainless steel makes sense to me as well. Any reason not to
use it?
>> >
>> >--------
>> >Larry Winger
>> >Tustin, CA
>> >601XL/Corvair from scratch
>> >Control surfaces and wing spars complete
>> >Making wing ribs
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >Read this topic online here:
>> >
>>
>http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=126750#126750<http://forum
s.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=126750#126750>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Zenith-List<http://www.matronics.com/N
avigator?Zenith-List>
Message 10
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Thrust angle in an XL with a Jabiru 3300 |
Craig,
My engine measured 2.7 degrees down. I had Al Beyer from Oshkosh over to
check it on the digital level. We decided to correct the problem. I sent my
motor mount back to Jabaru and they brought a new one out to EAA for me.
Jabaru found the top tubes were cut one inch too long! I had a talk with the
owner of the company in when he was at the Neenah airport. He told me there
were some early mounts out there that were made by a subcontractor in
Wisconsin that were built wrong! Jabaru replace the mount for free, and was
very gracious about it. Top notch people! I'm putting my engine on this week
and I will let you know if the problem has been fixed.
I would prefer to get as close to the plans as I can while shimming the
engine down or neutral. Over the years the engine will compress the mounts
and sink somewhat. Then I can shim it up over time. A heck of a lot better
idea than to re-trim the cowl!
Joe in Oshkosh
Message 11
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Thrust angle in an XL with a Jabiru 3300 |
Craig,
My engine measured 2.7 degrees down. I had Al Beyer from Oshkosh over to
check it on the digital level. We decided to correct the problem. I sent my
motor mount back to Jabaru and they brought a new one out to EAA for me.
Jabaru found the top tubes were cut one inch too long! I had a talk with the
owner of the company in when he was at the Neenah airport. He told me there
were some early mounts out there that were made by a subcontractor in
Wisconsin that were built wrong! Jabaru replace the mount for free, and was
very gracious about it. Top notch people! I'm putting my engine on this week
and I will let you know if the problem has been fixed.
I would prefer to get as close to the plans as I can while shimming the
engine down or neutral. Over the years the engine will compress the mounts
and sink somewhat. Then I can shim it up over time. A heck of a lot better
idea than to re-trim the cowl!
Joe in Oshkosh
Message 12
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Control cables for 601XL |
remember the leverage available, I reckon that the elevator has a
leverage of about 2.5 to 1, so a pull of 200lbs will give a load of
around 500lbs on the cable. The leverage on the rudder pedals is less,
but you can exert a LOT more pressure with your feet! I weigh about
200lbs, when I go upstairs I am pressing with 200lbs with each foot in
turn, without much effort - i would be able to push a lot harder than
that with the right incentive.
Dave Johnson
601XL
do not archive
----- Original Message -----
From: paulrod36@msn.com
To: zenith-list@matronics.com
Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2007 3:44 PM
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Control cables for 601XL
Sort of a side issue----- While I wouldn't advocate using string or
safety wire for control cables, it does seem a bit of overkill to use a
cable stronger than the max gross weight of the aircraft. It's not
possible, even under high adrenalin situations, to exert anywhere near
breaking strength of the cable, particularly sitting in the cockpit. If
anything, you'd rip the control surface apart first, assuming you could
maintain that much air load on the part. Same goes for turnbuckles. Do
we really need 900 pound breaking-strength turnbuckles on an elevator we
could put, at most, 200 pounds of backstick pull?
Paul Rodriguez
601XL/Corvair
Canopy getting close to done
Message 13
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Is Dave Austin still on this list? |
Hi List,
I have tried to contact Dave Austin about the use of Stolspeed's vortex
generators on my HDS Zodiac, but Dave's old email address (
daveaustin2@can.rogers.com )bounces back. If you're still on the list Dave,
or someone has Dave's new email address, please contact me off list.
Thanks!
Paul Hartl, N414PZ, 100 hrs
Do not archive
Message 14
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Control cables for 601XL |
More or less true, but consider a: how fast must you go to exert an
over 200 pound air load on something as small as a rudder? b: Even if
you were going that fast, you'd certainly bend the rudder or tear off
the horn before failing the cable. It's something like fishing for trout
with a tow truck and a log chain
Paul R
----- Original Message -----
From: Dave Johnson<mailto:david_a_g_johnson@btinternet.com>
To: zenith-list@matronics.com<mailto:zenith-list@matronics.com>
Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2007 10:19 AM
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Control cables for 601XL
remember the leverage available, I reckon that the elevator has a
leverage of about 2.5 to 1, so a pull of 200lbs will give a load of
around 500lbs on the cable. The leverage on the rudder pedals is less,
but you can exert a LOT more pressure with your feet! I weigh about
200lbs, when I go upstairs I am pressing with 200lbs with each foot in
turn, without much effort - i would be able to push a lot harder than
that with the right incentive.
Dave Johnson
601XL
do not archive
----- Original Message -----
From: paulrod36@msn.com<mailto:paulrod36@msn.com>
To: zenith-list@matronics.com<mailto:zenith-list@matronics.com>
Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2007 3:44 PM
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Control cables for 601XL
Sort of a side issue----- While I wouldn't advocate using string or
safety wire for control cables, it does seem a bit of overkill to use a
cable stronger than the max gross weight of the aircraft. It's not
possible, even under high adrenalin situations, to exert anywhere near
breaking strength of the cable, particularly sitting in the cockpit. If
anything, you'd rip the control surface apart first, assuming you could
maintain that much air load on the part. Same goes for turnbuckles. Do
we really need 900 pound breaking-strength turnbuckles on an elevator we
could put, at most, 200 pounds of backstick pull?
Paul Rodriguez
601XL/Corvair
Canopy getting close to done
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Zenith-List<http://www.matronics.com/N
avigator?Zenith-List>
Message 15
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Ordered the fuselage, landing gear, and controls kits from Zenith today.
Yesterday I got my crankshaft back from the local machine shop. Tapped, magnaflux
passed, 10/10 regrind, nitrided & polished.
Also placed an order with Clarks Corvair for most of the remainder of my engine
components like bearings, etc.
All with the blessings of my wife. Neighbor's attempted intervention was for naught.
Thanks for the help and advice everyone!
Patrick
XL/Corvair
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=127189#127189
Message 16
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Thanks to everyone for your comments.No one really addressed the absence of nitriding
and why it took so long but I spoke to the A&P that services my 172 and
he was really surprised that anyone would have sold engines without nitrided
cranks. Stay with certified engines he says to avoid these self-professed experts
who don't follow "best practices" in the industry and wait for an engine
to fail to figure out what was obvious to any experienced A&P.
One thing that bothered me but that I now think was just a setup is IP. I don't
want to encourage any kind of patent violations so I tried to contact Wynne
and never got a response just like my other messages. This tells me taht all the
hoopla over that is just BS. If anyone has evidence that they are doing something
wrong, please pass it on because I'm pretty close to ordering one of their
engines.
Seems like Microsoft has good company in thinking that competition is wrong from
some of the e-mails I got. I haven't seen any patent or anything on Wynne's
site so I have to wonder how much of this is being directed by wyyne hismelf
to protect his monopoly. If he really invented anything, wouldn't he have patented
it especially since he seems to make so much money on the engines?
---------------------------------
Luggage? GPS? Comic books?
Check out fitting gifts for grads at Yahoo! Search.
Message 17
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Neighbor's tried to |
I was just going to say the same thing. Most likely the airline pilot is jealous
this guy actually has time to work in his garage instead of being an all hours
of the day and night flying bus driver. LOL
do not archive
amyvega2005(at)earthlink. wrote:
> i have found that many people in this world do not like it when other people
are enjoying life to the fullest and will project that by expressing their concerns
to the person they see as someone who isdoing something they wish they could.
Sad but true.
>
> juan
> --
--------
Andy Shontz
CH601XL - Corvair
www.mykitlog.com/ashontz
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=127197#127197
Message 18
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Corvair engines |
I think William's attitude is mainly driven by the number of times people have
ripped him off - ordered parts, reversed engineered them and started selling on
eBay. If you follow the Corvair email list, you'll note that this happens every
3 or 4 months. He probably does make a pretty good profit on a single engine,
but, if you look at what it takes to run a business like his vs. the volume
he's selling, then it's obvious that he ain't gettin' rich off this. Note
that none of the rip-off competitors have flourished even with their lack of
development costs.
I don't know why he hasn't applied for patents on any of his original creations,
other than to avoid giving more money to lawyers. Even if you hold a patent,
to enforce it requires giving even more money to lawyers. Likely just not worth
it to WW.
I think the nitriding issue didn't really arise until the Corvair found its way
into high performance aircraft - KR's/601's. The engine was so understressed
in the Piet's, it wasn't a problem. Nitriding was being discussed by WW and
the Corvair list about the time cranks started breaking. A better place to debate
this would be on the Corvair list. Realize that it would be a historical
debate tho', as conventional wisdom now concurs with your A&P's opinion. Just
don't expect them to take an attack on WW kindly; even tho' there are several
there that aren't too thrilled with his customer service performance. FWIW,
the scuttlebutt is that it's getting better.
IMO, if you want an off-the-shelf corvair conversion, then buy it from William.
Just don't expect to get it tomorrow.
Disclaimer - I have no connection to William Wynne. Not even a customer as this
point, but prob'ly will be in the near future.
gregnk8(at)yahoo.com wrote:
> Thanks to everyone for your comments.No one really addressed the absence of nitriding
and why it took so long but I spoke to the A&P that services my 172 and
he was really surprised that anyone would have sold engines without nitrided
cranks. Stay with certified engines he says to avoid these self-professed experts
who don't follow "best practices" in the industry and wait for an engine
to fail to figure out what was obvious to any experienced A&P.
> One thing that bothered me but that I now think was just a setup is IP. I don't
want to encourage any kind of patent violations so I tried to contact Wynne
and never got a response just like my other messages. This tells me taht all
the hoopla over that is just BS. If anyone has evidence that they are doing something
wrong, please pass it on because I'm pretty close to ordering one of
their engines.
> Seems like Microsoft has good company in thinking that competition is wrong from
some of the e-mails I got. I haven't seen any patent or anything on Wynne's
site so I have to wonder how much of this is being directed by wyyne hismelf
to protect his monopoly. If he really invented anything, wouldn't he have patented
it especially since he seems to make so much money on the engines?
>
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=127204#127204
Message 19
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Neighbor's tried to |
Here's a cute related story to lighten us all up a bit. An airliner makes a rather
rough landing and as it is taxiing in, the big jet passes in front of a little
Sonex holding short. The pilot of the airliner says over the ground control
frequency, "What a cute little plane! Did you make it yourself?" Not missing
the sarcasm, the Sonex driver says, "Yep, made it out of airliner parts. Another
couple of landings like your last one and I'll be able to make another one".
Dred
Do Not Archive
> amyvega2005(at)earthlink. wrote:
> > i have found that many people in this world do not like it when other people
are enjoying life to the fullest and will project that by expressing their concerns
to the person they see as someone who isdoing something they wish they
could. Sad but true.
> >
> > juan
Message 20
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Corvair engines |
Greg:
Not to criticize your information source, but an A&P is NOT the final
authority in engine design or industry 'best practices'. He has opinions just
like
you and I, and with his training and background he is almost certainly going
to embrace the Conti-Lycomo-Saurus dinosaurs that are in our certified
airplanes. It is this predisposition to anything new that has kept our
firewall-forward choices in the Dark Ages for so long. For instance, how many
certificated Diamond Katanas were sold with the Rotax engine? Not all that many.
Why? The established A&P crowd would not embrace anything new!! What is the
dominant engine in the new Light Sport designs? Rotax ! It appears to me a
lot of A&P's are going to be brought into the realm of LSA's kicking and
screaming if they want to work in this part of aviation.
OK, what is nitriding? It is a case-hardening of the crankshaft. A hard
shell a couple of thousands thick. Is it a good idea? Sure, why not...but
we'll let the engine designers answer that. Is it absolutly necessary for every
aviation engine? No....look at all the early Corvair conversions and most
any other auto conversion engine. I'm not convinced nitriding is the magic
bullet to any crankshaft breakage issue.
Finally, with regard to patents....do you have any idea how expensive it is
to get a patent? Lawyers can only LEGALLY 'hold themselves out' (legal term
there) as specialists in only two areas of law: Admiralty Law (The Law of the
Seas) and Patent Law. I can assure you these guys do Not Work Cheap. I
don't see a cost/benefit equasion working out here in favor of patent
exploration, not to mention the issuance of a patent.
Wynne holding a monopoly? I don't see it. If you want the benefits of his
development activities, buy his product.
Or go it alone.
Tracy Smith
601XL tail, working on wings
In a message dated 8/2/2007 12:16:04 PM Eastern Standard Time,
gregnk8@yahoo.com writes:
Thanks to everyone for your comments.No one really addressed the absence of
nitriding and why it took so long but I spoke to the A&P that services my 172
and he was really surprised that anyone would have sold engines without
nitrided cranks. Stay with certified engines he says to avoid these
self-professed experts who don't follow "best practices" in the industry and wait
for an
engine to fail to figure out what was obvious to any experienced A&P.
One thing that bothered me but that I now think was just a setup is IP. I
don't want to encourage any kind of patent violations so I tried to contact
Wynne and never got a response just like my other messages. This tells me taht
all the hoopla over that is just BS. If anyone has evidence that they are
doing something wrong, please pass it on because I'm pretty close to ordering
one of their engines.
Seems like Microsoft has good company in thinking that competition is wrong
from some of the e-mails I got. I haven't seen any patent or anything on
Wynne's site so I have to wonder how much of this is being directed by wyyne
hismelf to protect his monopoly. If he really invented anything, wouldn't he
have patented it especially since he seems to make so much money on the engines?
http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour
Message 21
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
> surprised that anyone would have sold engines without nitrided cranks
Correct me if I'm wrong but I don't believe the Jabiru cranks are nitrided
either. According to the manual the cam and cam journals are. Not sure about
the Rotax.
-- Craig
Message 22
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Control cables for 601XL |
The overall breaking strength of the cable is not the only criteria
involved. You want to have a generous safety factor built in and there
is the matter of abrasion resistance. If the cable for some reason
starts wearing against something to the extent that some of the wires in
the cable are damaged, you don't want the cable to fail catastrophically
before the damage can be discovered during an inspection on the ground.
That's why there is a minimum size required for control cables on
certificated aircraft.
paulrod36@msn.com wrote:
> Sort of a side issue----- While I wouldn't advocate using string or
> safety wire for control cables, it does seem a bit of overkill to use a
> cable stronger than the max gross weight of the aircraft. It's not
> possible, even under high adrenalin situations, to exert anywhere near
> breaking strength of the cable, particularly sitting in the cockpit. If
> anything, you'd rip the control surface apart first, assuming you could
> maintain that much air load on the part. Same goes for turnbuckles. Do
> we really need 900 pound breaking-strength turnbuckles on an elevator we
> could put, at most, 200 pounds of backstick pull?
>
--
Bryan Martin
Zenith 601XL N61BM
Ram Subaru, Stratus redrive
Do Not Archive
Message 23
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Corvair engines |
Papa Foxtrot wrote:
> Nitriding was being discussed by WW and the Corvair list about the time cranks
started breaking.
I read that after I typed it and didn't like the sound of it. It's not like cranks
were snapping left and right. I know of only a couple of reported in-flight
failures - not that I'm an "authority" on the subject. Mark Langford's was
the most "famous"; mainly due to his penchant for putting everything on his
web site. IIRC, even Mark allowed that his failure might have been caused by
incorrect prop indexing. He's now "flying the pee out of" a 3100cc that he built
from the pieces of his broken motor. Dif'rent case, crank(nitrided of course)
and new internal wear parts, but most of the rest from his ill-fated first
motor. I thinks Mark's proven that the 'vair is a tough little motor.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=127212#127212
Message 24
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Control cables for 601XL |
I'm not an A&P or an authority of any note but I have been told that these cables
are overkill-sized in order to minimize their stretching and springing back
and forth like a bungee. The concept as told to me is to have something (A) strong
enough to be very unlikley to fail under tension loads, (B) heavy enough
to withstand surface wear (as you mentioned), and also (C) dimensionally stable
in the longitudinal axis to make tension adjustment feasible.
Personally, I just trust that CH chose and or approved the choice of cable and
apparently his planes aren't falling out of the sky due to cable failure. I'm
reluctant to second guess the issue beyond that point. Just my two cents worth
(and probably over-priced at that).
Dred
---- Bryan Martin <bryanmmartin@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> The overall breaking strength of the cable is not the only criteria
> involved. You want to have a generous safety factor built in and there
> is the matter of abrasion resistance. If the cable for some reason
> starts wearing against something to the extent that some of the wires in
> the cable are damaged, you don't want the cable to fail catastrophically
> before the damage can be discovered during an inspection on the ground.
> That's why there is a minimum size required for control cables on
> certificated aircraft.
Message 25
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Where did you get the tip on the discount? I placed an order today online,
and could not find any reference to this.
CS
Do not archive
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of ROBERT SCEPPA
Sent: Wednesday, August 01, 2007 4:46 PM
Subject: Zenith-List: 10% from Wicks
> Just a reminder: There's a 10% discount and free shipping until Friday
> of this week from Wicks Aircraft.....Do not archive
Message 26
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: 10% from Wicks |
I placed one today by phone and got. I think you have to mention Oshkosh
though.
Aaron
----- Original Message -----
From: "C Smith" <pilot4profit@sbcglobal.net>
Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2007 2:47 PM
Subject: RE: Zenith-List: 10% from Wicks
>
> Where did you get the tip on the discount? I placed an order today online,
> and could not find any reference to this.
> CS
> Do not archive
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of ROBERT SCEPPA
> Sent: Wednesday, August 01, 2007 4:46 PM
> To: zenith-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Zenith-List: 10% from Wicks
>
>
>
>> Just a reminder: There's a 10% discount and free shipping until Friday
>> of this week from Wicks Aircraft.....Do not archive
>
>
> --
> 4:53 PM
>
>
Message 27
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Corvair engines |
Greg-
You have to realize that Corvairs weren't designed with flight in
mind. Nevertheless, I believe nitriding makes sense. I base my statement
on conversations with people that locally build NASCARs and top fuel
dragsters.
What doesn't make sense to any of these experts or myself is why you
would want to weaken the crank with an undercut radius. The only
structurally positive effect you can get is if the radius is rolled in
from the OEM.
I tend to agree with other Corvair builders- some "Fixes" are well
founded, and some are knee-jerk reactions to current problems.
This is EXPERIMENTAL aviation. YOU have to choose what expert's
advice you agree with. Once again, I emphasize YOU. If you want a
warranty and a guarantee, buy a Wichita product.
do not archive
Bill Naumuk
HDS Fuse/Corvair
Townville, Pa
----- Original Message -----
From: Greg Kendall
To: zenith-list@matronics.com
Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2007 1:13 PM
Subject: Zenith-List: Corvair engines
No one really addressed the absence of nitriding and why it took so
long but I spoke to the A&P that services my 172 and he was really
surprised that anyone would have sold engines without nitrided cranks.
Message 28
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Too bad that wasn't in the original post.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Aaron Gustafson
Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2007 5:46 PM
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: 10% from Wicks
--> <agustafson@chartermi.net>
I placed one today by phone and got. I think you have to mention Oshkosh
though.
Aaron
----- Original Message -----
From: "C Smith" <pilot4profit@sbcglobal.net>
Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2007 2:47 PM
Subject: RE: Zenith-List: 10% from Wicks
>
> Where did you get the tip on the discount? I placed an order today online,
> and could not find any reference to this.
> CS
> Do not archive
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of ROBERT SCEPPA
> Sent: Wednesday, August 01, 2007 4:46 PM
> To: zenith-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Zenith-List: 10% from Wicks
>
>
>
>> Just a reminder: There's a 10% discount and free shipping until Friday
>> of this week from Wicks Aircraft.....Do not archive
>
>
> --
> 4:53 PM
>
>
Message 29
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Control cables for 601XL |
sounds good, good luck.
Juan
-----Original Message-----
>From: Larry Winger <larrywinger@gmail.com>
>Sent: Aug 1, 2007 10:00 AM
>To: zenith-list@matronics.com
>Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Control cables for 601XL
>
>Juan,
>
>If you look at my first post, you'll see that I did call Zenith and that
>stimulated my question to the list. The person in the shop was almost
>positive they were using stainless steel. Obviously, I didn't get my answer
>from the designer or an engineer. Maybe that is my next step (or I can just
>use galvanized to be safe).
>
>Thanks,
>Larry Winger
>
>
>On 8/1/07, Juan Vega <amyvega2005@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>> check with zenith but I beleieve I used GLAV 7x19 with 2000Lb strength
>> versus SS7x19 with 1750 lbs strength.
>> Jaun
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> >From: Larry Winger <larrywinger@gmail.com>
>> >Sent: Aug 1, 2007 12:30 AM
>> >To: zenith-list@matronics.com
>> >Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Control cables for 601XL
>> >
>> >I'm planning to purchase my cable from Aircraft Spruce, so I'm making an
>> >assumption that it is aviation grade as you described. If so, any
>> thoughts
>> >on stainless steel in place of the specified galvanized?
>> >
>> >Larry Winger
>> >601XL/Corvair
>> >Tustin, CA
>> >
>> >
>> >On 7/31/07, Juan Vega <amyvega2005@earthlink.net> wrote:
>> >>
>> >
>> >>
>> >> use the 7x19 aviation grade. they are grease impregnated.
>> >>
>> >> Juan
>> >>
>> >> -----Original Message-----
>> >> >From: lwinger <larrywinger@gmail.com>
>> >> >Sent: Jul 31, 2007 6:29 PM
>> >> >To: zenith-list@matronics.com
>> >> >Subject: Zenith-List: Control cables for 601XL
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >The plans (6-B-23) say 1/8" 7x19 Galvanized control cables. The folks
>> in
>> >> the shop at Zenith say they are using stainless steel.
>> >> >
>> >> >Stainless steel makes sense to me as well. Any reason not to use it?
>> >> >
>> >> >--------
>> >> >Larry Winger
>> >> >Tustin, CA
>> >> >601XL/Corvair from scratch
>> >> >Control surfaces and wing spars complete
>> >> >Making wing ribs
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >Read this topic online here:
>> >> >
>> >> >http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=126750#126750
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
Message 30
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: 10% from Wicks |
>
> Too bad that wasn't in the original post.
Call them back and ask for the discount. If they don't want to give it to
you, cancel the order and re-order WITH the discount.
I'm sure they'll work with you.
Rick Pitcher
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Aaron
> Gustafson
> Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2007 5:46 PM
> To: zenith-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Zenith-List: 10% from Wicks
>
> --> <agustafson@chartermi.net>
>
> I placed one today by phone and got. I think you have to mention Oshkosh
> though.
>
> Aaron
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "C Smith" <pilot4profit@sbcglobal.net>
> To: <zenith-list@matronics.com>
> Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2007 2:47 PM
> Subject: RE: Zenith-List: 10% from Wicks
>
>
>>
>> Where did you get the tip on the discount? I placed an order today
>> online,
>> and could not find any reference to this.
>> CS
>> Do not archive
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
>> [mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of ROBERT
>> SCEPPA
>> Sent: Wednesday, August 01, 2007 4:46 PM
>> To: zenith-list@matronics.com
>> Subject: Zenith-List: 10% from Wicks
>>
>>
>>
>>> Just a reminder: There's a 10% discount and free shipping until Friday
>>> of this week from Wicks Aircraft.....Do not archive
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> 4:53 PM
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> 4:53 PM
>
>
Message 31
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Corvair engines |
They break to.
On a side note, I had a Chevy 4.3lL v 6 and I broke the crank. I then went
and installed a new crank and wouldn't you know it guess what? You guessed it I
broke another crank in the exact same place. I later found out what the
cause was and it was the harmonic balancer. The point is that the more corvair's
that get into the air the chances of one failing increases. It is our
responsibility to find a fix for the problem and let everyone know what we find
out.
William has his faults but what he is trying to do is help us build the
safest auto conversion out there and I for one will be helping get corvair's in
the air and I am doing it with a lot of people telling me why I shouldn't. I'm
glad the Wright brothers didn't listen to the doubters either.
Jeff
This is EXPERIMENTAL aviation. YOU have to choose what expert's advice you
agree with. Once again, I emphasize YOU. If you want a warranty and a
guarantee, buy a Wichita product.
http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour
Message 32
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Thrust angle in an XL with a Jabiru 3300 |
Hi Craig:
I had an occasion to call Caleb at Zenith also.
I told him that the pre-drilled factory side skin 6-B-11-2 had the wing
at 81.8 degrees instead of the plans 81 degrees. He said that it was
close enough.
I told him that the bottom of the skin between the gear and the spar did
not follow the plans. He said to force it.
We ended up remaking both forward skins to conform to the plans.
Your 4 degrees droop sounds like a lot to me.
I'm not sure that Caleb understands the seriousness of properly building
and flying your own plane.
Just my opinion..................Fred Sanford............601XL riveting
fuselage
Message 33
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Thrust angle in an XL with a Jabiru 3300 |
I apologize for speaking about something I clearly am not qualified
to speak about since I am just starting a 701 and have no knowledge
of the Jibiru what so ever. However, I have been building engine
mounts for a variety of aircraft for some time and I have never been
asked to provide 4 degrees of down thrust. The range is from ZERO
down thrust to 1.2 degrees. I can't recall any more than that. If
the isolation dampeners are that soft, then I wonder about how badly
the engine must be vibrating. Also, I don' t understand why a
different engine would have a different thrust angle. The thrust
angle is determined by the designer and then it is adhered to by the
builder regardless of the engine. Just my opinion Jerry
On Aug 2, 2007, at 7:47 PM, fred sanford wrote:
>
> Hi Craig:
> I had an occasion to call Caleb at Zenith also.
> I told him that the pre-drilled factory side skin 6-B-11-2 had the
> wing at 81.8 degrees instead of the plans 81 degrees. He said that
> it was close enough.
> I told him that the bottom of the skin between the gear and the
> spar did not follow the plans. He said to force it.
> We ended up remaking both forward skins to conform to the plans.
> Your 4 degrees droop sounds like a lot to me.
> I'm not sure that Caleb understands the seriousness of properly
> building and flying your own plane.
> Just my opinion..................Fred Sanford............601XL
> riveting fuselage
>
>
Message 34
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Neighbor's tried to |
Careful buddy....
I was one of those bus drivers, and today as I finish my 601XL I can
attribute the experience and monatary measures to that position of "all
hours" to be able to afford this hobby I have today. Incidently,
Scheduled Carrier (121) only flys approximately 70 hours a month or we
would be over "Regs". When I flew Corporate before Scheduled Aircarrier
a lot of times I may have been away from home for several weeks at a
time. The "Bus Driver Position" most always had me home when the
schedule showed me off.
Do not archive
ashontz wrote:
>
>I was just going to say the same thing. Most likely the airline pilot is jealous
this guy actually has time to work in his garage instead of being an all hours
of the day and night flying bus driver. LOL
>
>do not archive
>
>
>amyvega2005(at)earthlink. wrote:
>
>
>>i have found that many people in this world do not like it when other people
are enjoying life to the fullest and will project that by expressing their concerns
to the person they see as someone who isdoing something they wish they could.
Sad but true.
>>
>>juan
>>--
>>
>>
>
>
>--------
>Andy Shontz
>CH601XL - Corvair
>www.mykitlog.com/ashontz
>
>
>Read this topic online here:
>
>http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=127197#127197
>
>
>
>
Other Matronics Email List Services
These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.
-- Please support this service by making your Contribution today! --
|